00 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited*4x4*tow Hitch*lthr*sunroof*fla Fresh*no Smoker* on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge Durango SRT vs. Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT | Which should you buy?

Choice is a good thing. And when it comes to high-performance sport utility vehicles, there are more choices today than ever before to tantalize buyers into showrooms. And why not? Americans love SUVs, and, while there's a stronger push to go green now than ever before in the history of internal combustion, there's still a large contingent of buyers who firmly believe in choosing the biggest, baddest, most powerful powerplant. For those buyers, the Dodge Durango SRT and Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT are two of the most potent options. But which one should you buy? They both deliver 475 horsepower and 470 pound-feet of torque to all four wheels through an eight-speed automatic transmission. They both do 0-60 in around 4.4 seconds, and both boast top speed numbers that will handily land you in jail if written on a speeding ticket. Choosing between the two, then, is a bit more nuanced than which is faster. That said, the Jeep is probably a bit quicker at the track than the Dodge. We'd wager than the Grand Cherokee SRT's 5,104-pound curb weight (versus 5,510 for the Durango SRT) and 114.8-inch wheelbase (versus 119.8) will pay small dividends in acceleration, cornering, and braking performance. So, if that's the only category by which you believe these SRT-fettled SUVs should be judged, choose the Jeep. View 17 Photos But let's get real here for a moment. As much fun as it is to wrangle a brutish ute 'round a racetrack – and trust us when we tell you it's a blast – the number of hi-po SUV owners who will ever show up at Bondurant in an SRT-badged 4x4 is probably in the single digits. So, when evaluating which of the two Hemi-powered vehicles is right for you, ultimate lap times are probably of little concern. If you're choosing between these two overpowered players, practicality is probably just as important as performance. And in that category, the Durango SRT comes out on top. For starters, the Dodge is a three-row SUV with six seats, whereas the Jeep is a two-row, five-passenger platform. Fold down the rear bench and there's 84.5 cubic feet of cargo area in the Durango, versus 68.7 in the Grand Cherokee. And if you tow, the Durango SRT's 8,600-pound max rating handily bests that of the Grand Cherokee SRT's 7,200-pound capacity. Ask yourself what's most important: performance or practicality. And then consider the price. The Dodge is nearly $4,000 less expensive than the Jeep.

25,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee, Dodge Durango SUVs recalled over brake feel

Chrysler has announced that it is recalling over 25,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango SUVs from several markets over concerns about brake feel under hard braking. The affected models are from the 2012 and 2013 model years, although the actual dates of production aren't available. 18,700 are in the US, while 825 are in Canada, 530 are in Mexico and a further 5,200 outside of North America.
According to a statement, Chrysler was informed of the issue by a component supplier for the Ready Alert Braking system, which primes the brakes in anticipation of an emergency stop. A component in the system was restricting the flow of brake fluid too much.
As Chrysler is quick to point out, the way the brakes functioned was in compliance with regulations and there are no reported cases of drivers losing braking power. Instead, the issue rests with what Chrysler calls a pedal feel that "was not consistent with customer expectations." So it would seem Chrysler is being proactive and fixing a problem not because there's a legal issue at work, but simply because it doesn't feel the way the manufacturer wants it to. Well done.

What would you drive in 1985?

Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985?  It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic."  West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today.   Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?